David Atlas activities in radar meteoroioyy, Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories cloud physics, and weather Bedford, Mass. modification in the Soviet Union (June 1965) 1. Introduction Dr. Lobodin. The visit at Voyekov was warm and their This report describes some of the activities in the fields facilities were displayed freely. of radar meteorology, cloud physics and weather modi- In the following sections I shall attempt to outline fication in the Soviet Union based on discussions with the activities of the various groups. A rather broad view a number of Soviet scientists and visits to three research of the entire field as of May 1964 has been given by establishments. My visit to the USSR was primarily in Battan in the BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN METEORO- connection with the International Colloquium on the LOGICAL SOCIETY (46, pp. 309-316). In cloud physics and Fine Scale Structure of the Atmosphere sponsored by weather modification, I seem to have gotten very similar the Inter-Union Committee on Radio Meteorology of information to that of Battan, and so I will only sup- URSI and UGGI and the USSR Academy of Sciences, plement his report with more recent material in these 15-22 June 1965 in Moscow. During the meetings I met areas. On the other hand, in radar meteorology I was with Dr. A. G. Gorelik and his colleagues from the able to spend much more time than Battan with the Central Aerological Observatory, and on 23 June, Dr. scientists concerned, and I conclude that we have prob- ably underestimated both the quantity and quality of V. V. Kostarev, Director of the Radar Meteorology the Soviet radar meteorological research. Group at CAO, joined us in an all day discussion. On Sunday, 20 June, all participants in the colloquium Clearly, the reader should be cautioned not to accept visited the Institute for Applied Geophysics at Obninsk this summary as entirely accurate or as an indication of the total of the Soviet effort. Our discussions could (about 100 km southeast of Moscow). Unfortunately, not possibly have been comprehensive, and on occasion, neither Dr. L. M. Levin or Dr. I. V. Litvinov, who my interpretation of what I was told may have been work in cloud physics and weather modification, were distorted because of language difficulties. I should also present. note that I was given over 100 recent reprints, several Following the colloquium I also visited the Ukranian new books (Clouds, Precipitation, and Thunderstorm Hydrometeorological Research Institute at Kiev (25 Electricity by M. S. Shishkin, 1964; Statistical Hydrome- June) where I had an all day meeting with the Di- chanics, Vol. 1 by Monin and Yaglom, 1965; and an rector, Dr. G. F. Prekhochko, who is evidently also Agroclimatological Atlas of the Ukraine, 1964). Until active in weather modification studies, and with Dr. V. this material is translated, even my interpretation of L. Muchnik, in charge of their radio meteorology pro- what I was told must be considered somewhat tentative. gram. Dr. Igor Ivanovich also was present. They were [A bibliography of this material may be obtained by all extremely warm and hospitable, spoke freely, and corresponding with Dr. Atlas.] showed me around the Institute. On 28 June I had a brief one hour visit at the main 2. Central Aerological Observatory office of the Main Geographical Observatory on the a. The Radar Meteorological Group northeast outskirts of Leningrad with Dr. N. Rusin, Headed by Dr. V. V. Kostarev, the radar group evidently Vice-Director, and Dr. Chuvayev, Assistant to Dr. Shish- comprises some 12 scientists. Since support personnel kin, the Chief of the Cloud Physics Department. I also such as technicians appear to be available in greater spoke briefly with Dr. M. J. Budyko, the director. Un- numbers than in the United States, it is undoubtedly fortunately, Shishkin was away on a field trip. Dr. V. the largest single group in radar meteorology anywhere Ya. Nikandrov, Vice-Director and an active leader in in the world. (In comparison, the AFCRL Weather cloud physics, was also absent. The next day, Dr. Rusin Radar Branch includes only 14 people of whom 6 are took me to the Voyekov Experimental Station, about scientists and 2 are professional engineers.) More im- 30 km northeast of Leningrad, where I spoke to Dr. portant, however, is the caliber of the people. Dr. A. Sal'man, Chief of the Radio Meteorology Department; G. Gorelik is an outstanding and prolific worker with Dr. Kolokolov, Chief of the Atmospheric Electricity an impressive record of high quality publications. His Department; and his associates, Dr. W. A. Solovjev and specialty is Doppler radar and signal theory; however, 696 Vol. 46, No. 11, November 1965 Unauthenticated | Downloaded 10/09/21 09:43 PM UTC Bulletin American Meteorological Society he clearly is a fine mathematician and has a good knowl- ods. For example, he was not quite sure of the radiation edge of meteorology, precipitation physics, and turbu- patterns of both antennas, and so the relative signal lence theory. Evidently he is also a highly capable radar strengths may be in error. He hopes to improve these engineer for he has designed (and actually built) some methods. sophisticated instruments in the field. Indeed, I know At the colloquium Gorelik reported on Doppler ob- of no other scientist anywhere with such a broad com- servations of night-time dot angels under conditions of petence in radar meteorology. very great stability. Apparently the angels were tracked I also met the following: Dr. A. A. Chernikov, special- simultaneously. The measurements showed both sharp izing in Doppler theory and angels; Dr. Iv. V. Mel'ni- changes in the tracks and sharp variations in the mean chuk, all aspects of radar meteorology, but recently in Doppler frequency by as much as 3 to 4 m sec"1. The Doppler; Dr. A. B. Shupiatsky, general radar meteorol- target cross-sections were about 10"3 cm2. Simultaneously, ogy and polarization studies; Miss (or Mrs.) G. A. Smir- the mean wind was about 10 to 12 m sec"1 and the stand- nova, general research, apparently experimental analyst; ard deviation as measured from the Doppler spectrum Dr. Bovsheverov, formerly a professor at Moscow Uni- of chaff echoes was only 10 cm sec"1. He was convinced versity, and now engaged in radar and meteorological therefore that such echoes could not be from atmos- instrumentation at CAO. pheric structures. I did not meet the following, who have co-authored papers with the above in the last few years: A. M. c. Quantitative precipitation measurements by radar Borovikov; S. P. Morgunov; I. G. Potemkin; and A. F. Kostarev asked me about the basis for the optimistic as- Kuzenkov. I do not really know if the latter are all sessment which I made in my 1964 Advances in Geo- members of the Radar Meteorology Group at CAO, physics article about the use of radar for the measure- but they appear to be from the publications. In any ment of rainfall. They have made rather exhaustive ex- case, the group is impressive. periments of radar rainfall measurements at 3.2 cm against a dense network of gages with linear spacing b. Angels of 1 km in an area 20 X 20 km. They have over 270 Chernikov described some of the observations, tech- days of observations. While the radar-raingage agreement niques, and data in greater detail than appear in his 1963 is excellent on some days, it is extremely bad on others. study (AFCRL Research Translation No. T-R-480). With This he attributes to day to day variations in drop-size respect to the vertical velocities he measured these on distribution in the storms. Even with time or space in- days during which the atmosphere appeared to be uni- tegration, the results are highly variable. He is there- formly filled with "dot" angels as observed by the time- fore very pessimistic about the use of radar for rainfall height record of his vertical beam 3.2 cm radar. He measurement. Averaged over a year the agreement is gated at one altitude and recorded the Doppler veloci- excellent, but for yearly rainfall one doesn't need a ties as the angels entered the gated volume. The time radar. The Soviet work and opinions on this subject constant of his Doppler velocity measurement was about are presented in a recent WMO report on radar me- 1 sec, so it was difficult to get the velocity-time history teorology prepared by Kostarev and Chernikov, and of an individual angel. However, the records of vz by Kessler of the United States. showed wide variability around zero to ± 3 m sec"1, with most in the 0 ± 2 m sec"1 range, and most with d. Radar calibrations positive velocities. There was a noted relation to the Kostarev was also very interested in the methods we meteorological conditions and time of day with great- use for radar calibration by a standard target. I noted est vz at mid-day. that calibrations are made with a balloon-borne sphere Some polarization studies have also been made of only before or after the rain and not during. He asked angels which show that many angel echoes are partly what I thought about setting up a standard sphere on depolarized (perhaps indicating rough or complex sur- a tower in a valley just behind a ridge which would faces) and some strongly depolarized. Their old antenna obscure all ground targets other than the sphere. This was capable of measuring depolarization ratios (parallel sounds marginal to me, especially since it could not to cross components) of 21 to 22 db.